It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence no plane crashed & buried in Shanksville; piles of dirt, but no piles of plane debris

page: 13
26
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfnow2

i have worked aircraft crashes before and you have to understand a plane hitting the ground at that speed
is like a missle, debris is going to go everywhere. it explodes up and out.

Is that what you think happened to Flight 93, it mostly exploded up and out?




posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker


The "1994" photo shows a dark, long "scar" on the ground, in the same general location....BUT, you will notice, that the UTube video did NOT superimpose the 2001 picture directly over the 1994 picture...lining it up, sizing and rotating to match. The existing "scar" from 1994? Different location than UAL 93 impact point.

No, it wasn't the same scar at the same spot, but do you admit it is quite a coincidence that only a few yards away from the ONLY plane crash to leave "wing marks" (officially - Flight 93), there was a scar in the earth years back that looked very similar?



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 08:09 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 20 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Still waiting for hard evidence tons and tons of plane debris was buried in that field.

Think you can show us some before this thread reaches 15 pages?!



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 08:37 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



Don't you think that it's just a tad odd that is the ONLY photo showing ONE piece of debris allegedly being unearthed out of the ground when supposedly 23% (your #) to 80% of the plane "embedded"?!


Focus - is it or is it not a photo of a piece of the plane that was "buried" (to use your word) at Shanksville on Sept. 11, 2001 from the crash of Flight 93?


And isn't it quite the coincidence that this one piece of debris just "happens" to fit in the backhoe bucket that's supposedly scooping it out?!


No.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
[more

based on what i have seen i see evidence the plane hit at a tremendous speed with such impact that it essentially acted like a missle hitting the ground. there is debris buried in the ground and most of it was vaporized. im sure there was a large field of debris scattered for quite some distance.

try this experiment on a small scale.

go somewhere high not real high and throw a baseball in soft ground as fast as you can. BE SAFE.
you will notice a small debris field expanding outward from the impact area. or you can go to youtube and watch stuff like this.

just so people realize none of the military planes that day were armed with missles and today there planes armed at select locations to respond if this were to ever occur.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 10:56 AM
link   
for those who are interested there is a simple way of seeing photos of the crash site and debris that was there. i have no doubt 93 impacted shanksville. none at all.


www.google.com...


go through these images.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 

Nice side-step hooper. Now answer my question. And btw, I did answer your question by mentioning that is the ONLY piece of debris supposedly coming out of the ground.


Not even a coincidence?! Man, you're hard core skeptic (ie denial).



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by surfnow2
reply to post by ATH911
[more

based on what i have seen i see evidence the plane hit at a tremendous speed with such impact that it essentially acted like a missle hitting the ground. there is debris buried in the ground and most of it was vaporized. im sure there was a large field of debris scattered for quite some distance.

So do you believe most of the plane blew up and out?



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911
reply to post by hooper
 

Nice side-step hooper. Now answer my question. And btw, I did answer your question by mentioning that is the ONLY piece of debris supposedly coming out of the ground.

Supposedly? Yes or no - is this not a piece of the plane coming out of the ground?

The answer to your other question is no. Now please explain how the fact that photos of every scrap of the plane recovered from the impact not being posted on the internet proves that Flight 93 did not crash in that Pennsylvania field on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.


Not even a coincidence?! Man, you're hard core skeptic (ie denial).


Nope. Why would it be? I see other pieces of scrap in the photo that are smaller than the bucket - so what?

So what's the next straw you're reaching for?



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Supposedly? Yes or no - is this not a piece of the plane coming out of the ground?

Yes, it's a plane piece supposedly being unearthed out of the ground.


The answer to your other question is no.

Wow man, just wow.


Now please explain how the fact that photos of every scrap of the plane recovered from the impact not being posted on the internet proves that Flight 93 did not crash in that Pennsylvania field on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.

I guess you're the only one in the world that thinks that if a group wanted to stage a plane crash that they wouldn't plant and stage plane debris.


Nope. Why would it be?

How do you think the perps would have staged that photo to make it look like engine piece was being unearthed?


I see other pieces of scrap in the photo that are smaller than the bucket - so what?

Yeah about those, what color are they?
edit on 21-12-2010 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


On IMPACT yes



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 



I guess you're the only one in the world that thinks that if a group wanted to stage a plane crash that they wouldn't plant and stage plane debris.

Kind of shoving that cart in front of the horse, huh? Prove it was staged. Any photos on the internet of them staging the plane wreckage? Unless you have something to evidence your fantasy about secret government gnomes sneaking into that field and "planting" plane wreckage then it stands (as it has for almost a decade now) that UAL Flight 93 crashed in a field outside of Shanksville, PA on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.

How do you think the perps would have staged that photo to make it look like engine piece was being unearthed?

Oh, I can think of a thousand different ways to create a visual story that communicates the idea of plane wreckage being removed from an impact crater. So what? Are you saying that your conspiracy "evidence" is limited only by your imagination?


I see other pieces of scrap in the photo that are smaller than the bucket - so what?

Yeah about those, what color are they?

Oh I don't know - all different colors, shades, etc. Why? Does plane wreckage only come in certain colors in your world?



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by surfnow2
reply to post by ATH911
 


On IMPACT yes

So do you believe this scenario could happen:

When Flight 93 hit the field, the front section broke off, blowing up and out, while the rest of the plane on back tunneled deep into the ground.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
hey guys think rationaly here for a moment. does anyone think a group of people drove out to this site, dug it up buried plane parts and created a plane accident? all of this happening in rural Pennsylvania where everyone knows everyone else? then left without being seen. think of the logistics just to get out there. you would need a backhoe or bulldozer, which would require a tractor trailer to carry it. then you need gas for all these vehicles. the manpower alone to fake an aircraft accident would be tremendous. think of the paper trail you would leave.

i hope no one thinks that when GW Bush was sitting in the school in Florida and was alerted to what was going on he said "Lets fake an accident scene in PA". Again there were no planes armed with active missles on any planes that were up that day. Typically your fighter jets carry INERT or training missiles, like carrying a nerf gun.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by surfnow2
 



does anyone think a group of people drove out to this site, dug it up buried plane parts and created a plane accident?


Yes, but be advised with the number of people that believe that scenario you probably couldn't put together a one on one basketball game.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Prove it was staged. Any photos on the internet of them staging the plane wreckage?

Um yeah, that photo of them supposedly unearthing that non-embedded dirt-free aged engine piece that coincidentally fits in the backhoe bucket also in the picture. Why do you think that the ONLY photo of them in the act of unearthing plane debris when supposedly they unearthed 80% of a 757?!?




Oh, I can think of a thousand different ways to create a visual story that communicates the idea of plane wreckage being removed from an impact crater. So what?

A thousand? Wow. I can only think of two. 1) pre-plant the engine. 2) Lower and drop an engine scrap in an ongoing excavated hole with a backhoe bucket, then photograph it as if they just unearthed it.


Oh I don't know - all different colors, shades, etc. Why? Does plane wreckage only come in certain colors in your world?

The colors will be limited to what airlines plane supposedly crashed there. So, what colors are those little pieces also seen in the hole?



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by surfnow2
 

Please answer my question first, then I'll comment on yours.



posted on Dec, 21 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ATH911
 


ill answer your question and then give you what i feel occurred.

i think your scenario is possible but probably didnt occur that way. to get a better idea as to what occurred forget everyone and their opinions and hit the pavement and talk to the residents and first responders. they are the best source as they were the first ones onscene. everyone on here is speculating and everyone is an expert witness.

this is what i feel happened based off the photographic evidence i have seen of the site i would say this plane came almost straight down with a slight angle and on impact what wasnt vaporized was either buried or propelled like a trampoline. that ground there appears to be a hard soil ground area so the speed this plane was going was very fast



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join